Immigrant Women and Partner Violence

(1)

IMMIGRANT WOMEN AND PARTNER VIOLENCE

Societal Risk Factors in Canada

HANNA KUUSELA University of Tampere

School of Social Sciences and Humanities Master Thesis of Social Work

April 2011

(2)

University of Tampere

Department of Social Work Research

KUUSELA, HANNA: Immigrant Women and Partner Violence. Societal Risk Factors in Canada.

Master Thesis, 76 p. +5 p.

Social Work

Supervisor: Hannele Forsberg April 2011

Violence against women is a global problem, which can be recognized in every society and culture.

Both in Canada and Finland the research about violence against immigrant women has begun quite recently and therefore, there is still a lot we do not know about this phenomenon and thus a demand for research. Immigrant women face unique circumstances and are in a vulnerable position of being abused. They are not a homogeneous group, on the contrary, they have individual life experiences but they all have been born outside the country of immigration and are so part of the minority.

Family violence is a gendered issue even though many researchers tend to use neutral terms and so to let the readers understand that both men and women can be equally violent. The reality is, nonetheless, unbalanced and it has been suggested that ”family violence” should be called ”male violence” since males are largely responsible for most of the domestic violence. This is the reason why in this thesis I focus only in the abuse against women, and especially against immigrant women.

My main question for this thesis is: what are the societal risk factors which make immigrant women vulnerable to partner violence. I believe that knowing an answer to this question might make it possible to help abused immigrant women in better way and gives information about what kind of changes should be done in the society so that immigrant women could free themselves from violence. To get more information about the topic I interviewed abused immigrant women and the workers who meet these women every day. I have used four major themes: racism, immigration status, social welfare and legal systems and collision of the cultures and built a semi-structured interview around them. The interviews were done in Canada but I write from a Finnish perspective so that the gained information could be used in Finland.

The literature review and interview data describe quite similar risk factors and reasons for abuse. A big difference between Canada and Finland is that the education and knowledge of those workers who work with immigrant women: in Canada there is a lot more experience and training about immigration issues. Finland has less immigrants and the awareness of the special needs of immigrants is quite new. There is a lack of culturally sensitive services and in my opinion, to improve the situation culturally sensitive work should be taught already during the social work university studies.

KEYWORDS: partner abuse, immigrant women, Canada, society, risk factors

(3)

Tampereen yliopisto

Sosiaalityön tutkimuksen laitos

KUUSELA, HANNA: Maahanmuuttajanaiset ja parisuhdeväkivalta. Yhteiskunnalliset riskitekijät Kanadassa.

Pro gradu -tutkielma, 76 s. +5 s.

Sosiaalityö

Ohjaaja: Hannele Forsberg Huhtikuu 2011

Naisiin kohdistuva väkivalta on maailmanlaajuinen ongelma, jota esiintyy kaikissa yhteiskunnissa ja kulttuureissa. Sekä Kanadassa että Suomessa maahanmuuttajanaisiin kohdistuvan väkivallan tutkiminen on alkanut vasta hiljattain ja siksi onkin vielä paljon, mitä emme tiedä tästä ilmiöstä.

Maahanmuuttajanaiset elävät ainutlaatuisissa olosuhteissa ja he ovat erityisen haavoittuvaisia väkivallalle. Maahanmuuttajanaiset eivät ole homogeeninen ryhmä, vaan heillä voi olla hyvinkin yksilöllisiä elämänkokemuksia, mutta yhdistävänä tekijänä he kaikki asuvat synnyinmaansa ulkopuolella ja kuuluvat siksi asuinmaansa vähemmistöön. Perheväkivalta on hyvin sukupuolittunut asia, vaikka monet tutkijat suosivatkin neutraalien termien käyttämistä, mikä voi aiheuttaa vääristyneen käsityksen siitä, että sekä naiset ja miehet olisivat yhtä väkivaltaisia. Todellisuus on kuitenkin hyvinkin painottunut ja siksi perheväkivaltaa pitäisikin kutsua “miesten tekemäksi väkivallaksi”, koska miehet ovat vastuussa suurimmasta osasta kotona tapahtuvasta väkivallasta.

Tästä syystä keskityn pro gradussani vain naisten ja erityisesti vielä maahanmuuttajanaisten kokemaan väkivaltaan.

Tutkimukseni tärkein kysymys on: mitkä yhteiskunnalliset tekijät altistavat maahanmuuttajanaiset parisuhdeväkivallalle. Tietäessäni vastauksen tähän kysymykseen voin miettiä, miten väkivaltaa kokeneita maahanmuuttajanaisia voisi parhaiten auttaa ja mitä yhteiskunnallisia muutoksia olisi tehtävä, jotta maahanmuuttajanaiset voisivat elää vapaina väkivallasta. Saadakseni lisätietoa aiheesta haastattelin väkivaltaa kokeneita maahanmuuttajanaisilta ja heidän kanssaan päivittäin työtä tekeviä työntekijöiltä. Rasismi, maahanmuuttajastatus, sosiaaliturva- ja oikeusjärjestelmä ja kulttuurien yhteentörmäys ovat valitsemani neljä pääteemaa, joiden pohjalta tein teemahaastattelunrungon. Toteutin haastattelut Kanadassa, mutta kirjoitan suomalaisesta näkökulmasta, jotta saamastani tiedosta voisi olla hyötyä Suomessa.

Kirjallisuuskatsauksessa ja haastatteluissa esiin nousevat väkivallan syyt ja riskitekijät ovat melko samankaltaisia. Kanadan ja Suomen välinen suuri ero on maahanmuuttajien kanssa työskentelevien työntekijöiden koulutuksessa ja kokemuksissa: kanadalaisilla työntekijöillä on paljon enemmän kokemusta ja koulutusta maahanmuuttoasioista. Suomessa on vähemmän maahanmuuttajia ja tietoisuus maahanmuuttajien erityistarpeista on melko uutta. Kulttuurisensitiivisiä palveluita ei juurikaan ole ja mielestäni tilanteen parantamiseksi kulttuurisensitiivisyyttä pitäisi opettaa jo sosiaalityön yliopisto-opinnoissa.

AVAINSANAT: parisuhdeväkivalta, maahanmuuttajanaiset, Kanada, yhteiskunta, riskitekijät

(4)

List of Tables and Figures

Table 1. Population by mother tongue 2006, p. 9.

Table 2. Women killed as victims of violence per 100 000 inhabitants, p. 16.

Table 3. Five-year rates of physical partner violence for immigrant women (researched 1999 and 2004), p. 18.

Table 4. Five-year rates of emotional abuse against spousal partners, by type of abuse and immigrant status (research is done in 2004), p. 18.

Table 5. Personal Risk Factors, p. 20.

Table 6. Societal Risk Factors, p. 21.

Table 7. Personal Details of the Clients, p. 32.

Table 8. Use of Interpreters, p. 49.

(7)

1 Introduction

I became interested in immigration issues while I was doing an internship in Canada in the fall 2007. I worked there in two non-governmental organizations and part of my tasks was to help those immigrant women who were living in an abusive relationship or were fleeing an abusive partner. I found my internship really interesting, and I learned a lot during my time in Canada. During those four months I was also a foreigner in a new country what made me think of all those variable problems which immigrant women face when immigrating from a totally new perspective. Many times the partner is the only person an immigrant woman knows in whole country and when that only person is abusive it makes that woman’s life extremely hard.

When I was writing my bachelor thesis in the spring 2008 I got the idea of going back to Canada to do the interviews for my master thesis there. For a long time it felt like an impossible mission until I met a Finnish-Canadian teacher Tuula Heinonen from the University of Manitoba when she was giving lectures in the University of Tampere in April 2008. She and my bachelor thesis supervisor Anna Metteri encouraged me to go to Canada and make my dream come true. I took the challenge in the fall 2008 and with the help of Heinonen I got in touch with two non-governmental agencies working with abused immigrant women in Canada. I requested to do qualitative interviews in the agency during my three-week trip there, and the agencies agreed to that. I applied and got funding from the Nordic Association for Canadian Studies and the University of Tampere to cover my flying and rent costs. On the request of the agencies I will not be telling the agencies´ names or cities in this thesis in order to protect the anonymity of the immigrant women I interviewed.

International learning and exchange of ideas have been my motives to do international research: I believe Finland has a lot to learn from Canada and vice versa. While I was still writing my master thesis I got a job in a little city in Pirkanmaa as an immigration social worker. I was the only social worker in that city working directly with refugees and immigrants and that emphasized my feeling that my subject is really important in order to do better social work in Finland. It seemed to me that there are still only few people who are experts in immigration issues, and in the majority of the cities there are not enough workers who are aware of the special problems of the immigrants.

Knowing more about the societal risk factors, which expose immigrant women to partner violence,

(8)

makes it possible to develop new working methods to integrate immigrants into the society so that their lives could be free from violence. This phenomenon is societally important since for example in Finland all the violence against women costs to state, municipality and employers ca. 50 million euros a year (see for ex. Kyllönen-Saarnio & Nurmi 2005, Piispa 2000). That number does not even include all the costs caused by the lost of health and welfare.

Going to another country and culture always brings unknown factors and demands even more reflective approach to the topic from the researcher. From my previous experiences abroad I have learned that when you go to other country you need to be able to adjust and not to expect that everything will go in the same way as in your home country. I have been born, raised and educated in Finland so I cannot say I would know that much about Canada than the Canadians. I do not even try to write my thesis like I was a Canadian, but since my aim is to do reliable research in Canada I have to have quite good basic understanding of Canadian policies and social system, and I think I gained that during my internship there at the fall 2007. All the data I collected, the analysis and the results are explained from a Finnish perspective. This thesis is written for a Finnish university and most of the readers will probably be Finns as well, therefore, I wanted to do my research so that the results could be useful in Finland. That is why I have added some basic information what is the situation of immigrant women in Finland and what kind of abuse they face in the Finnish context.

To understand the societal differences between Canada and Finland and the context in which immigrant women live in these countries I describe the some typical characters of these countries. I go through some facts about the social policies as well, in order to explain the different kinds of social welfare systems. According to Harvey (2005) the Canadian population is dominantly white and British and French by descent even though a small percentage are aboriginal Canadians.

(Op.cit., 539-540) Canada is divided into ten provinces and three territories, which have their own government beneath the federal government. Therefore, many important laws are formulated in the provincial level, for example laws considering health care, education and marriage. Thus the laws may vary widely across the country. Canada is liberal welfare state by its nature, similar to Australia and New Zealand. Families are supported only when they have proved not to be able to survive on their own and have depleted all their own resources. (Baker 2001; ref. Harvey 2005, 540.) In general, Canada relies on both means-tested forms of welfare and private market-based insurances. Thus the national share of the social welfare is smaller. The most important means- tested assistance is social assistance, and compared to the United States the benefit levels are higher and there occurs less poverty in Canada. However, the only benefit entitled by the citizenship is free

2

(9)

health care. (Myles 1996, 116-140.)

It is common in Canada that children grow up in families where both parents are working. These dual-earner families make 62 % of all the households. In 21 % of families only other one of the parents is working. In Canada parents are forced to work to provide economic necessities because even dual-earner families with children may encounter economic hardship. (Lero 2003; ref. Harvey 2005, 543.) Canadians are able to get transfer payments if they are unemployed and qualify for Employment Insurance (EI). Parental leave is possible up to one year after the birth at EI rates and pension is also offered for those who are qualified for it. In addition for these social welfare assistances there is also provincial or territorial assistance for low-income families including monetary transfers and tax credits. Child welfare is controlled by the provinces for the needs of those families who are unable to take care of their children. In Canada corporal punishment is still allowed to be used by the parents and teachers since Canadian Criminal Code allows ”reasonable force” to be used to control the children. (Harvey 2005, 543-546.)

The Scandinavian welfare states including Finland have a reputation of having generous welfare state entitlements and high levels of particularly women participating into labor force. High-income replacement rates and citizenship benefits are characteristic for the Scandinavian countries. The coverage is universal and it has been criticized that the citizenship not the market participation forms the basis for entitlement to income, goods and services. (Stephens 1996, 32-35.) Also high taxation is often seen as a burden instead of a mean for equality (look for ex. Anttonen & Sipilä 2000.) However, according to Forsberg (2005) Finland is considered to be one of the most equal countries in the world, for example Finnish women were the first ones in Europe to get the right to vote in elections. Finland is also pioneering country when concerning the rights of the children.

(Op.cit., 262-265.) Any corporal punishing of a child is strictly forbidden in Finland, which does not mean that it does not happen but at least it is criminalized.

Canada is way a head of Finland in immigration policies since it has such a long history of immigration and the number of immigrants coming to Canada every year is huge compared to Finland. According to my own experiences in Canada, you can hear and see the multiculturalism all the time as well as in for example Toronto or Montreal. In Finland the capital region is the most multicultural region although, even there the scenery is still quite homogeneous. However, the social system in Finland is totally different than in Canada. In Finland immigrants are financially supported and taken care of and there are benefits for people who cannot make their living on their

(10)

own. In Canada health care is the only subjective right and even that is forbidden from the legal immigrants during the first three months. Roughly saying Canada is so called ”night guard” state like USA and people are supposed to support themselves without benefits from the state.

The differences in social welfare system may be vital in immigrant woman’s life. If she wishes to leave her partner she must be able to support herself in Canada. In Finland even an immigrant woman can usually survive alone just by receiving the universal benefits. For example an unemployed woman can get housing allowance and unemployment benefit here so she probably would not end up homeless. If she has children she would also get child benefit and maintenance allowance for taking care of the children. In Canada an immigrant woman can only apply for the social assistance, and get tax benefits if she has children but the amounts are low. There is subsidized housing available but the application process can take years if you do not have a reference letter stating that you are a victim of domestic violence - then you might get housing faster.

In Canada the so-called third sector has an important role in offering social services, which in Finland are usually offered, by the municipality. For this master thesis I visited two Canadian non- governmental agencies, which probably get some of their funding from the government, but they also have to do some fundraising on their own. This kind of agencies may have a huge variety of services depending on the size and funding. For example legal services and counseling services are commonly offered even though most of the social work might be quite the same what social workers do in Finland. The agency may offer its services to a part of the city or the whole city, or the whole province. Sometimes the services are only for women, sometimes only for men, or only for immigrants, or only for immigrant women. In Finland the services are usually for everybody who lives in the area of that municipality. However, there are also specialized non-governmental agencys, which complement the services of the municipality.

4

(11)

2 The Research Question and the Objective of the Research

Violence against women is a global problem, which can be recognized in every society and culture.

Both in Canada and Finland the research about violence against immigrant women has begun quite recently and the first studies are from 1990s (see for ex. Korhonen & Ellonen 2007, Migliardi &

Blum & Heinonen 2004). Therefore, there is still a lot we do not know about this phenomenon and thus a demand for research. Immigrant women face unique circumstances and are in a vulnerable position of being abused. They are not a homogeneous group, on the contrary, they have individual life experiences but they all have been born outside the country of immigration and are so part of the minority.

Previously, in my bachelor thesis I did a literature review in which I looked for those risk factors, which make immigrant women vulnerable to partner violence in Finland and Canada. I searched through all the literature I could get in to my hands concerning specifically partner violence against immigrant women. It was not easy to find any literature about immigrant women in Finland and most of my literature from Canada was in electronic form. I summarized the results in two categories: personal and societal factors. Below these two categories I added seven subclasses:

personal history, language problems, social network, collision of the cultures, racism, immigration status and social security and legal systems (see tables 5 and 6).

There are a lot of same kind of risk factors in Finland and Canada. Especially, the personal factors are really similar in both countries. In the societal risk factors the differences between countries are more visible, and when I analyzed the results I came to the conclusion that the social security and legal systems play an in important role when we compare Finland and Canada. The Finnish constitution gives everybody in Finland the right to minimum welfare and care (Constitution Law 19§). In Canada everybody should make their living on their own. This is huge ideological difference, which is one of the causes, for example more broad homelessness. In Canada the nature of legal processes is different and they are more common than in Finland, which makes the system look more bureaucratic and complicated to an immigrant woman. For example in Finland you

(12)

usually do not need a lawyer to get a divorce or custody of your child unlike in Canada.

Now I look deeper in the societal risk factors and get more information about the topic from the real source: abused immigrant women and the workers who meet these women every day. I chose to use the same themes as in my bachelor thesis and build a semi-structured interview around them. My main research question is: what are the societal risk factors which make immigrant women vulnerable to partner violence. When I know the answer to this question it may be possible to look for better ways of helping abused immigrant women and make some suggestions about what should be changed in the society.

Already when I was doing my internship in Canada I faced the complexity of working with immigrants in a foreign cultural context. When I was planning my thesis I had to consider the fact that I will be doing the interviews in three-dimensional way: I have to consider my own cultural background, the Canadian cultural context and the cultural background of the person being interviewed. I know I might face both language and cultural barriers and I have to keep them in mind in order to avoid misinterpreting the interviewee. Both my interviewee and me are using English, which is neither her first language nor mine. In addition, the topic is really sensitive and I do not want to pressure the interviewee to tell me any further information than she feels comfortable telling. I had to keep all these challenges in my mind when I did the interviews and analyzed the data.

While doing the interviews in Canada I used the opportunity to do also some literature research to complete my literature review. Therefore, I also scheduled some time to read and write during my trip and not only to do interviews. This was really helpful because I was able to find a lot of literature on the subject from the Canadian university libraries. After the trip the real work really began when I started to transcribe the interviews: it took a lot of time and energy to get all the data in a written form especially because of the variety of the accents of the interviewees. I used theme interview so I thought it would be logical to also use theme analysis: I organized all the data according to the themes and so I get to my results.

6

(13)

3 Concepts and Theories

3.1 Who Is an Immigrant?

There are a lot of concepts and terms related to immigrants which are easily mixed up with each other, and I think it is also necessary to have some understanding what different permits mean in order to gain a proper understanding of the immigrant woman’s situation. In Canada ”immigrant” is usually a person who is legally eligible to stay in Canada either as a permanent resident, a visitor, a student or a refugee (Smith 2004, 4-5). The term ”refugee” means a person who has been forced to flee from his own country because of the fear of persecution. ”Asylum seeker” is a person who has applied for asylum as well as the refugee status but has not yet got any decision on the matter. The term ”refugee claimant” is used in the same way as asylum seeker but it usually refers to other than the refugees of the UN´s refugee agency UNHCR (The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees). (Canadian Council for Refugees 2004.) In Canada the commonly used term ”visible minority” refers to people who belong to other minorities than to aboriginal people and whose skin color is not white. Basically, visible minority means those people who are not white. The term ”non-visible minorities” means those people who belong neither to the visible minority nor to the aboriginal people of Canada. (Smith 2004, 5.) Usually, the aboriginal people do not have white skin either.

In Finland the Aliens Act defines a foreigner as somebody without the citizenship of Finland (Aliens Act 3§). According to Martikainen and Tiilikainen (2007) immigrant usually means somebody who has been born abroad and a returnee is a person whose family is originally from Finland and who moves back to Finland after living or being born abroad. Refugees come to Finland either as convention refugees through UN´s refugee agency UNHCR or as independent asylum seekers. (Aliens Act 90§: Martikainen & Tiilikainen 2007, 18.) Asylum means a residence permit given to an asylum seeker. Furthermore, residence permit means a permit given to a foreigner to visit the country frequently and stay in the country for a longer time. Work permit means permit to work in Finland or in a Finnish ship. Family-reunificater is a person living in Finland whose family members are also allowed to apply for residence permit while they may still

(14)

be abroad. (Aliens Act 3§.) Migrant usually means a person who moves to Finland because of his work (Martikainen & Tiilikainen 2007, 18).

In this thesis I use the word immigrant in its broader meaning referring to everybody who has been born outside the country where he or she is currently living. This broad term makes it possibly to focus to those people who have immigrated into another country and therefore, they are facing the problems of adjusting into a new environment. I acknowledge that convention refugees, asylum seekers and for example, those who immigrate because of a new job may have really different kind of experiences but what is common is that they are all living outside their country of origin.

3.2 Immigration and the Sponsorship Program

During the years of 1991-2001 most of the immigrants came to Canada from East Asia (432 235), South Asia (295 110) and South-East Asia (185 665). There were also more than 100 00 immigrants coming from East Europe, West Asia, Middle East, Africa, Middle and South America. Overall almost two million people came to Canada during the ten-year period. After the year 1961 almost five million people have immigrated to Canada. (Statistics Canada 2001.)

The official languages of Canada are English and French but there are over six million inhabitants who do not speak either of these two. Five most common unofficial languages are Chinese, Italian, German, Punjabi (India and Pakistan) and Spanish. In 2006 19 % of the total population of about 32,8 million people spoke some other than official languages. In comparison, only 21 % of the population spoke French. (Statistics Canada 2006.)

8

(15)

Table 1. Population by mother tongue 2006.

Source: Statistics Canada 2006. (Modified)

Every year the government of Canada decides how many foreigners they will take in to the country that year. During last ten years Canada has accepted on an average 220 778 immigrants and refugees a year. Those people coming into the country have been either skilled workers, business people, refugees, relatives of Canadian citizens, foreign students, temporary workers or something else. Almost 60 % of the immigrants have been skilled workers and business people.

To understand the different scale of immigration in Canada I will shortly introduce some of the main numbers and facts of immigration in Finland. At the end of the year 2006 there were 5,2 million inhabitants in Finland and about 97,7 % of them were citizens. Thus 2,3 % of people (121 739 persons) living in Finland were foreigners. Most of the foreigners were citizens of Russia (25

Language Speakers

English French

Non-official languages Chinese

Italian German Polish Spanish Portuguese Punjabi Ukrainian Arabic Dutch

Tagalog (Pilipino) Greek

Vietnamese Cree

Inuktitut (Eskimo)

Other non-official languages Total population

19 328 545 6 857 425 6 194 960 1 016 705 456 195 455 545 212 930 347 540 219 995 368 045 135 020 266 755 132 505 236 225 118 420 142 155 78 890 33 005 1 975 030 32 778 935

(16)

326), Estonia (17 599), Sweden (8 265) or Somalia (4 623). From the population 91,5 % spoke Finnish. After Finnish, Swedish and Sami the most spoken languages in Finland were Russian, Estonian, English, Somali and Arabic which were spoken by 3,0 % population. (Statistics Finland 2006b.) According to the Finnish Aliens Act a foreigner can get either a permanent or a temporary residence permit. Without a residence permit it is legal to stay in Finland for a total of three months during six months period if a foreigner comes from a country whose citizens are allowed to stay in Finland without permit, for example the citizens of EU countries. (Aliens Act 33, 34, 40 §.) In 2007 there were given about five thousand work permits, four thousand student permits, five thousand permits to stay for family reasons and about three thousand other permits Total number of permits was 17 204. (Finnish Immigration Service 2008.) The citizens of Nordic countries, EU countries, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway or Switzerland do not need a permit to stay, work or study in Finland (Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland 2008).

Canadian foreign policy allows people to sponsor family members including spouse, children, parents or grandparents in to the country. During the period of 2000-2002 there were 26 800 convention refugees brought in, and private Canadians can sponsor refugees as well if they want to.

Every year 68 800 foreign students come in to the country. (Citizenship and Immigration Canada 2008a.) In the context of my research it is essential to know more about what the sponsorship program means to an immigrant woman so I go through more specifically the sponsorship of a partner. Canadian citizen or permanent resident can sponsor a spouse, common-law partner or conjugal partner so that he or she can come to Canada and get permanent resident -status. The sponsor must be 18 years of age or older, reside in Canada and able to provide for the basic requirements of the person being sponsored (food, clothing, shelter etc.). Canadian government publishes every year the amount of minimum necessary income, which one needs to have in order to be allowed to be a sponsor. The sponsor will be responsible for the sponsored person for the next three years after the person becomes a permanent resident. If the sponsored person needs any federal, provincial or municipal social assistance it is seen as the default of the sponsor’s obligations and the sponsor may have to repay the benefits and will not be allowed to sponsor others in the future before all the payments are made. In the application process the applicants have to authenticate their relationship and the sponsored person must meet all the applicable requirements to become a permanent resident. (Citizenship and Immigration Canada 2008b.)

10

(17)

K. Ekuwa Smith describes in her article ”Implications for Service Delivery for Immigrant and Refugee Women” (2007) a study done about homelessness rates of abused immigrant and refugee women and explains some of the main reasons for them. Most of the women interviewed for this the study had immigrated under sponsorship program. Their knowledge of the immigration system was poor and they felt that their sponsor had all the power over them. ”I had no idea about what my status was. All I knew was that that my status depended on him.” He kept saying that bringing me over had cost 10, 000 that I had to re-pay before I left him.” ”I thought I had a status, only to find out that he had never filed the sponsorship papers.”(Smith 2007, 173-175.)

In her article Smith (2007) concludes that the sponsorship program creates imbalance between man and women and with the lack of language skills the women is in vulnerable position and so the abuse can easily occur. The abuse and the breakdown of the sponsorship may lead immigrant and refugee women to homelessness. The sponsor can have the total control of the women and the sponsorship also impacts the way the other family members see the situation: the woman is often blamed for not acting thankful enough and can be excluded from the family if she leaves her partner. Especially in the arranged marriages even the family in the country of origin thinks the woman is acting indecently. (Op.cit.)

3.3 What is Partner Violence Against Women?

Duffy and Momirov (1997) argue that their book ”Family Violence: A Canadian Introduction” is the first time when Canadian material on family violence has been brought together. Before there have been only textbooks from USA about the issue. The study of family violence has begun in Canada with the arose of feminism in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Social scientists addressed violence in the family for the first time in the 1980s, which is relatively late in contrast to general family studies, which have quite a long history. According to Duffy and Momirov (1997) argue that family violence does not occur outside the context: it is not inherent in individuals or families, but in the nature of relationships. Family violence is a gendered issue even though many researchers tend to use neutral terms and so to let the readers understand that both men and women can be equally violent. The reality is, nonetheless, unbalanced and it has been suggested that ”family violence” should be called ”male violence” since males are largely responsible for most of the domestic violence. The terms used vary widely in the research literature. The terms rarely tell the

(18)

exact truth about what was done by whom to whom which makes the violence difficult to define and understand. Some terms include all violence and not just physical one and some include only the ”severe” physical violence. What is severe might be then hard to define. Is severe only when at least 25 % of the body is covered with bruises or what is it? Is one punch on the face acceptable but two punches is abuse? Without specific terms even the victim cannot define her experiences and does not know how to call it what happened to her. She knows that she was been treated in a wrong way but was she abused? (Op.cit., 10-16, 26-29.)

In this thesis I chose to use terms partner violence, or similarly partner abuse to name the phenomenon. The terms ”partner violence” and ”partner abuse” are gender neutral but with the help of the statistics I will show that reality of partner violence is strongly gendered, and a woman is typically the victim. I refuse to use the term ”family violence” since its too wide in nature including also, for example child abuse and elder abuse, which are not in the focus of my interest. I define partner violence as all the violence done by a man or a woman against his or her partner who is living or has been living with him or her. I narrow partner violence in to the violence done only in the heterosexual relationships and I specifically focus on the partner violence done against women.

I do not go through violence done by a woman or violence done in the homosexual relationships.

In the United Nations´ Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action (1995) the term ”violence against women” is described in a very international and accurate way.

113. The term "violence against women" means any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or private life.

Accordingly, violence against women encompasses but is not limited to the following:

(a) Physical, sexual and psychological violence occurring in the family, including battering, sexual abuse of female children in the household, dowry-related violence, marital rape, female genital mutilation and other traditional practices harmful to women, non-spousal violence and violence related to exploitation;

(b) Physical, sexual and psychological violence occurring within the general community, including rape, sexual abuse, sexual harassment and intimidation at work, in educational

12

(19)

institutions and elsewhere, trafficking in women and forced prostitution;

(c) Physical, sexual and psychological violence perpetrated or condoned by the State, wherever it occurs.

114. Other acts of violence against women include violation of the human rights of women in situations of armed conflict, in particular murder, systematic rape, sexual slavery and forced pregnancy.

115. Acts of violence against women also include forced sterilization and forced abortion, coercive/forced use of contraceptives, female infanticide and prenatal sex selection. (Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action 1995, paragraphs 113-115.)

After Lehtonen and Perttu (1999) the typical forms of partner violence are physical, emotional, sexual and financial abuse. Violence can also be invisible and occur in the forms of neglect or discrimination. Physical abuse includes for example beating, kicking, strangling, physical forcing to make the woman to do something and keeping in captivity. Thus physical abuse is easiest form of partner violence to recognize even though usually different forms of violence exist together at the same time. (Op.cit., 36-45.)

Emotional abuse is probably the most common form of partner violence. It can be verbal or non- verbal and occur for example as enslaving, humiliating, controlling, threatening, name-calling and shouting. Often, partner violence begins with emotional abuse and when time pasts it continues as physical abuse. In this kind of relationship a woman confronts many negative feelings: shame, guilt, fear, depression and loneliness. Especially shame and depression can have significant consequences in a woman´s life and at worst case the woman can even end up taking her own life. (Lehtonen &

Perttu 1999.)

There are three main theoretical explanations used to explain the partner violence against women:

social learning theory, theories of gender and masculinity and feminist theories. In social learning theory it is believed that violent behavior is learned by modeling others. This kind of modeling usually happens in a context where violence is seen to result in positive consequences. Man can learn his way of acting from his family members if he has seen or experienced violence in his childhood or from the wider society. Violent childhood experiences increase the risk of later violent behavior and provide the opportunity to learn how to use violence. Theories of gender and

(20)

masculinity see violence as the outcome of social training when man is considered as a dominant and controlling over woman. Violence is, thereby, the natural way for a man to express his masculinity. Feminist theories explain violence to be caused by those social structures, which sustain the power inequality between man and woman. (Johnson & Ollus & Nevala 2008, 79-82.)

According to Wiehe (1998) even though partner violence is understood as a personal problem since it has the most severe impact on individuals, it is truly a societal problem. This kind of problems occur when the institutions created to carry out the basic functions in society do not exist or fail to do their task and end up discriminating and oppressing the least powerful members of the society.

Partner abuse can be seen as a reflection of the failure of society to provide protection and opportunities for growth, development and enhancement for all its members. Therefore, partner abuse has to be prevented in all levels: personal, community and societal. (Op.cit., 124-125.)

According to Johnson et al. (2008) it is beneficial to prevent child abuse since that may also reduce the violence done against the female partner later in life. Interventions to partner abuse brings down the number of children who are witnessing violence and who so learn that violence is the right way to solve problems in a intimate relationship. Women who were abused or witnessed abuse in their childhood have a significant risk of being victims of partner violence in adulthood. Other well- known risk factors for violence against women include following characters of the male partner:

controlling behavior, alcohol abuse and violent behavior outside home. Reduction of public violence by men may also reduce domestic violence against women. (Op.cit., 79-82.)

Johnson et al. (2008) describe five recommendations how to end violence against women: promote gender equality, improve service delivery, hold offenders accountable, prevention, and monitoring and evaluation. There is a need for societal changes to improve the status of women and to break down the inequalities between genders so that it would be possible to create a climate where violence is discouraged and not tolerated. The strict gender roles may be damaging to women, as well as many societal norms and attitudes. Johnson et al. demand countries and communities to take more active role to ensure that women are not discriminated against their rights and that they have access to education, employment and health care. There should be legislation to protect women and the criminal code should specify that partner violence is a criminal act and not a private issue. There should be a wide variety of data collected including statistical and descriptive information for

14

(21)

monitoring and evaluation of the available services and policies. (Op.cit., 168-174.)

3.4 Partner Violence Against Majority Women

Violence against women and girls continues unabated in every continent, country and culture. It takes devastating toll on women’s lives, on their families, and on society as a whole. Most societies prohibit such violence – yet the reality is that too often, it is covered up or tacitly condoned. ”Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, 8th of March 2007” (Unifem 2008.)

About 7 % of the over 15 years old Canadian women have experienced intimate partner violence in the present or previous relationship during the last five years before the research in 2005 (this includes only physical violence). Serious forms of violence including being beaten, choked, or threatened with or had a gun or knife used against them, had experienced 23 % of the abused women. A fear for their life had been reality for 34 % of the abused women. Those women who belong to the aboriginal people are three times more likely to be victims of partner violence than other women. Emotional abuse was reported by 18 % of women and financial abuse by 3 % during the last five years. In 2003 64 women were killed by their partners as victims of partner violence.

(Statistics Canada 2005.)

According to Statistics Finland in the year 2000 about 19 % of the Canadian women have experienced violence or have been threat by it during the last five years. In Finland the same rate was about 16 %. (Heiskanen 2001.) The rates vary depending on the source because the term partner violence is used in such variable ways and sometimes the term violence only means physical violence and sometimes it covers all the other forms of abuse too. Since it is really difficult to find reliable reference values for the countries I have used this quite old statistic from Statistics Finland since it has researched the same phenomenon in both countries in the same year. Thus we can make the conclusion that there is slightly more partner violence in Canada than in Finland.

As can be seen from the table 2 more women were killed in Finland as victims of partner violence than in any other developed country except United States: there are 1,9 women of killed per every

(22)

100 000 inhabitants a year. The same rate in Canada is 0,9, which is less than half compared to Finland. The role and meaning of family have being brought up in the discussion as explanatory factors since in the Nordic countries family is in less important role than in the southern Europe.

(Heiskanen 2001.) However, this does not explain why there were two times more women killed in Finland compared to other Nordic countries.

Table 2. Women killed as victims of violence per 100 000 inhabitants.

Source: Finland Statistics 2001 (modified).

16

Country Year Value

Russia 1997 10,1

Kazakhstan 1997 8,6

Moldova 1996 7,2

Estonia 1998 6,3

Latvia 1998 6,2

Lithuania 1997 4,6

Brazil 1995 4,5

USA 1997 3,2

Cuba 1996 2,8

Finland 1996 1,9

Belgium 1994 1,4

Poland 1996 1,4

Australia 1995 1,2

Austria 1998 0,9

Canada 1997 0,9

Denmark 1996 0,8

Ireland 1996 0,8

Norway 1995 0,8

Sweden 1996 0,8

France 1996 0,7

Germany 1997 0,7

Italy 1995 0,5

Spain 1995 0,4

Iceland 1995 0

(23)

3.5 Partner Violence Against Immigrant Women

United Nations´ Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action (1995) defines some women more vulnerable to violence than others. These women are for example women who belong to minority groups, indigenous women, refugee women, women migrants and displaced women. (Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action 1995.) The forms of partner violence against immigrant women are quite the same as against majority women. However, adjusting to a new country and having difficult life experiences in the past can make the situation initially a lot harder to an immigrant woman. In a new country man may also have new means to control and use power over woman. (Kyllönen-Saarnio & Nurmi 2005, 28-29.) Immigration background affects the likelihood of admitting the existence of violence in the ethnic community. There is a tendency to hide and deny violence not to attract negative attention to the community. The whole issue may be insisted to be just a ”Western” issue, which does not exist or belong to their families or traditions. The denial of the violence makes it even more difficult to access services or to be supported as an abused immigrant woman. (Narayan 1995; ref. Erez & Britz 2006, 201.)

Partner violence against immigrant women is almost as common as violence against majority women in Canada. There are some difficulties to interpret the reliability of studies done among immigrant population since all wider studies have been done only in English and French. There has been no translation or explanation of concepts available for immigrant women. Therefore, even the Statistics Canada admits that the rates might be too low when concerning immigrant women knowing that there are about 2,6 million women in Canada who speak neither of the official languages. (Statistics Canada 2004c.) About 10 % of the immigrant women have reported emotional or financial abuse in their relationship (from the majority women 14 %). Physical abuse was reported by 4 % of the immigrant women (from the majority women 6 %) and every tenth abused woman had been in contact with the police, which is almost as rare as in the majority (12

%). (Smith 2004, 18-19.)

According to Statistics Canada (2004c) immigrant women face slightly less partner violence than majority women as can bee seen from the table 3 and 4. Most common forms of emotional abuse in this research are put-downs and name-calling, jealousy and checking where the woman is going.

(Statistics Canada 2004c.)

(24)

(25)

In Finland, as well in Canada, there are no extensive statistics about partner violence against immigrant women since all the existing statistics are based only on to the information given by police and shelters. Yet, it has been estimated that immigrant women face more violence than women who belong to the majority. (Kyllönen-Saari & Nurmi 2005, 23-26.) In 2005 72 % of the abused immigrant women had suffered physical violence, 6 % sexual abuse and 22 % threatening with violence. From the physical violence 60 % had been categorized as partner violence and most common victim of violence was 18-29 years old immigrant woman who already had the Finnish citizenship. According to the country of origin women from Russia, Sweden and Estonia faced most of the violence (from which countries also majority of the immigrant women are). During the year 2005 five immigrant women were killed as victims of violence. (Korhonen & Ellonen 2007.) A study done in 2002 found out that in the half of the cases when an immigrant woman reported partner violence the offender was ex-partner and in half of the cases he was the present partner (Ministry of the Interior 2002).

3.6 Previous Research about Risk Factors

In my bachelor thesis I did a literature review about what makes immigrant women vulnerable to partner abuse in Finland and Canada. I categorized the results in two classes: personal and societal factors. Under these two classes I categorized seven subclasses: personal history, language problems, social network, collision of the cultures, racism, immigration status and social welfare and legal systems. Collision of the cultures is situated on both personal and societal classes because of its multidimensional nature. The literature has outlined the results since the classes were chosen according to the literature I had from both countries. Even though, there are factors that can be seen as effective in both countries I have not added them under the other one if they were not mentioned in the literature of that country. For example the factors under the personal history -class are quite similar.

(26)

Table 5. Personal Risk Factors.

20

Finland Canada

Social Network

- no family or relatives close by

Personal Factors

Personal History

- big change in the social status when immgrating into a new country

- traumatic experiences in the past may cause mental problems

-underrating current violence in comparison to past experiences

- traumatic events in the past - homesickness

Language Problems

- non-professional interpreter is used - information is not available in the mother tongue

- believing in rumours and empirical knowledge and not having right information

- the role of Finnish partner is emphasized

- no possibilities to ask for help without knowing the language

- non-professional interpreter is used or even the partner can be used as an interpreter

- narrow social network

- divorce can isolate from the whole ethnic society

Collision of the Cultures

- the belief that “good motherhood”

means that woman has to stay home - violence is not known to be forbidden

- violence is seen as eligible - acculturation

(27)

Table 6. Societal Risk Factors.

Finland Canada

Racism Societal Factors

- discrimination

- getting a job can be difficult

- discrimination

- getting a job is difficult without Canadian degree or work experience

Immigration Status

- staying in the country depends on the residence permit

- woman is often financially and informationally dependent on the man - the man may threaten with divorce, deportation or taking away the children

- blaming the woman for not being thankful enough

- the fear of child protection

- complicated immigration system - sponsorship binds woman to the spouse in the fear of deportation and woman-sponsor is also obligated provide maintenance for spouse

- getting a residence permit is difficult if the sponsorship breaks down

Social Welfare and Legal

Systems

- fear of authorities - no knowledge of benefits, services or the Finnish law

- getting a low-rental apartment is difficult and there is no housing benefits - no right to use the health services during first three months

-financial difficulties - no knowledge of the rights, services or the Canadian law

- fear of authorities - divorce and getting the custody of a child are legal processes

-child protection can apprehend the children if a mother fails to protect them

Collision of the Cultures

- rape in a marriage is accepted in many cultures

- violence is seen as a man´s right in some cultures

- conflict between different kind of values and norms

- the change in man´s social status and role can cause aggressivity - religion may effect in the attitude against for example divorce

- the change in the gender roles may cause aggressivity and the man can for example control woman´s working - new home country may question the traditional values and religion

(28)

There were many similar risk factors in Canada and Finland. In this thesis I focus only in the risk factors in Canada and I do not go any further to the Finnish ones than what is mentioned in the tables 5 and 6. According to Alaggia and Maiter (2006) an immigrant faces many challenges when she comes to a new country: new language, acculturation (assimilation into a new culture), isolation from the majority, discrimination, financial difficulties and homesickness. In the new country the whole social system is foreign including complicated immigration system and strange schooling, health and social welfare system. In addition, many immigrants have very traumatic history behind them, which can make the situation even harder and stressful. The Canadian culture may be in a conflict with the immigrant’s own cultural and religious background. All these factors make the life of an immigrant family strained, which makes the women vulnerable to partner violence. Cultural background also has a significant effect on how ineligible partner violence is seen. (Op.cit., 100.) Language problems may also be a barrier to get help especially if the partner is acting as an interpreter for the woman:

”You could see a woman for two to three years. She could be beaten every time before her appointment, but you would not be told that because her partner is interpreting for her. Only professional interpreters should be used.” (Smith 2004, ix.)

Many risk factors are the same for the immigrant women than to the majority women. However, since an immigrant woman has moved into a new country she has lost the proximity and support of her own family. She can be extremely isolated from the whole society without knowing any safe place to go. She might not know her rights, the laws or the legal system of the country. (Smith 2004, viii.) In the study done by Wachholz and Miedema (2004) in New Brunswick, Canada it was found out that majority of the interviewed immigrant women had almost no knowledge about legal issues, for example about protection orders, peace bonds, property and pension rights upon divorce, and mandatory arrest policies. Wachholz and Miedema admit that these are quite complicated matters but without any basic understanding of their rights immigrant women are left in a very vulnerable position. (Op.cit., 207-208.)

Many immigrants are afraid of authorities and cannot trust them because of their previous experiences. In the worst case the partner tells the woman false information about Canada and especially about how easily the woman can be deported. The man can be worried that the woman would leave him if she knew more about her rights in Canada. (Smith 2004, 26-27.) Some of the immigrant women are afraid of the racist treatment from the Canadian police. They have the feeling

22

(29)

that the police operate using stereotypical ideas of immigrant women. The police may think that immigrant women are capable to endure the violence and so does not offer protection for them.

These kinds of assumptions make it more difficult for immigrant women to ask for help. (Wachholz

& Miedema 2004, 210.)

Some of the immigrants are originally from countries where the man is seen as the head of the family and so controlling and beating the wife is seen as his right. If the woman is from that kind of culture she breaks the traditional norms if she leaves her partner and as a result she can end up being excluded from the whole ethnic community. For many immigrant women leaving an abusing partner means poverty for her and her children. Getting a job in Canada can be difficult without Canadian work experience or degree. If a woman comes to Canada at the same time with her partner but she gets a job first, he can see it as a threat to his honor as being head of the family and providing the living for the family. The change in the gender roles can cause strong conflicts and even violence if the man takes his frustration on the woman. Often, the ethnic community values the traditional gender roles, and so he may even forbid her from working outside home if he has not got a job yet. (Smith 2004, 24-26.)

Ayyub (2007) explains in her article ”The Many Faces of Domestic Violence in the South Asian American Muslim Community” how Muslim women face different kind of difficulties than the majority when they are trying to get a divorce. An Islamic marriage usually has two levels in America: religious and the civil marriage. The religious ceremony includes the ”Nikah” which is an agreement to enter to a marriage and give an agreed sum of money to the groom by the bride. The meaning of civil marriage is just to get the marriage registered in the country of immigration. Like marriage, divorce also has two levels and so the civil divorce is not enough to set a woman free to remarry. The religious divorce is final only when the man gives ”Talaq” to his wife in the presence of two witnesses. In many cases, the Muslim man grants a women divorce in the civil court but does not grant her the religious divorce. Islam allows a man to have four wives but the woman cannot remarry before she gets the Talaq. Women face problems if they want to travel back to the country of origin since there they are still seen as a wives of the men who left them. Often, divorced women are seen as damaged goods and people tend to think the divorce was their fault. Divorced women are viewed as carriers of bad luck and they may have big difficulties to get married again. (Op.cit., 27-30.)

(30)

In Canada the immigrants are not eligible to the health services during the first three months after arriving into the country and so to get health services they need to have a private health insurance.

This is a big barrier to the abused women if they do not have an insurance and they need help in that time. After the first three months the state offers free health services to everybody who has a legal status in the country. However, there are rarely health services offered in the woman’s own language or in the culturally sensitive way. In some cases the woman goes to a doctor who belongs to her own ethnic community which can stop her from telling about abuse since she might be afraid that the doctor will tell others in the community or belittle the woman’s experience. (Alaggia &

Maiter 2006, 109.) One extreme example of the difficulties immigrant women may face when requiring health services is discrimination because of the lack of language skills. In Finnish context Tiilikainen (2000) tells a story about a somali woman who did not speak proper Finnish but a health professional refused to call for an interpreter because it is so expensive to use interpreter and it is better to save tax payers money. Therefore, the health professional asked the woman always to bring somebody with her who can speak Finnish. (Op.cit., 107.)

Migliardi, Blum and Heinonen (2004) criticize that many of the services are planned for the needs of the majority and there is not enough culturally sensitive services available. Current services are mostly provided in English and even their outreach materials are usually not translated. There is a lack of personnel from minority groups, appropriate health care services to immigrant women’s needs, and a lack of counseling for women who come from diverse cultural backgrounds. Formal social services can be difficult to understand for a woman who knows no English. (Op.cit., 80-83.)

24

(31)

4 Methodological Issues

4.1 Ethics of the Research

I have to admit that I found my subject quite difficult for such an inexperienced researcher as I am.

Before going to Canada to do the interviews I was doubtful if I am going to succeed doing the interviews. Fortunately, I had some experience of social work already and as told before, I had done an internship in Canada working with abused immigrants. However, I made sure to find about all the permits and papers needed before the trip in order to do have all the paperwork done properly. I discussed about the research permit with the organizations, but they did not need me to apply for one. Before the interviews both the clients and workers signed a consent form where I explained the meaning and topic of my research. I took time to let them read the paper properly and usually asked if they had any questions before beginning with the interview. I described in the consent form (see appendix 3) that I mainly ask questions about women’s experiences on racism, immigration, social and legal systems and the collision of the cultures. I told the immigrant women that I understand that it might be difficult for them to talk with me about their life experiences and I want them to tell me only as much as they feel comfortable telling. I recorded the interviews and I have promised to keep the tapes and my notes safe from outsiders. I will save the records and transcripts only for my own use in the future and I will not let anybody else to use them. I respect the clients and workers for their willingness to share some of their knowledge with me, and I acknowledge the possibility of both language and cultural barriers, which I have to keep in mind in order to avoid misinterpreting the interviewee. No information that discloses interviewees´ identity will be released or published.

In the first agency the clients were also required to sign release form stating that my research was not part of the agency’s work and the agency is not responsible of any harm I might cause to the clients. I gave the release forms to the agency when I was done with the interviews. Both agencies asked me to give 10 dollars (ca. 6 euros) honorarium to the clients after the interview and also to get them to sign that they had received the honorarium for their participation. For ethical reason I fist did not agree to give clients money because in Finland it is not acceptable or preferable way of getting the client’s consent to the research. However, I was explained that in Canada clients are used to get an honorarium from the local students, and that is it why I have to do give it to them too.

(32)

Despite my concerns I gave the clients 10 dollar after the interview as I was told to do but I did not tell the client about the money beforehand. Afterwards, I found it quite interesting to see the different kind of responses when the clients received the money. Many of them were really surprised and thankful and asked if the money was from me or from ”the government”. One of the clients even refused to take the money when she realized that it was from me. One other client donated the money to the agency right away after leaving the interview room.

According to Hirsjärvi and Hurme (2009) one of the most important ethical questions when planning to do interview is to consider how to make the interviewees life situation better. The ethical principles demand the interviewer to get informed consent and protect the identity of the interviewer to maintain the trustworthiness. The interviewer must be aware of the risks caused to the interviewee, for example stress. (Op. cit., 20) I think that the ethical principals are even more important when doing culturally sensitive research. The risks of causing harm are much higher when dealing with both culturally and emotionally sensitive issues.

Writing the thesis affected me as a person as well. Like Merja Laitinen (2004) noticed when interviewing sexually abused people, a grave subject takes a lot of energy when day after day one has to think about hard and violent issues. Laitinen noticed that some people wanted to tell her more than she wanted to hear, and she felt it as her responsibility to listen. (Op. cit., 62). I think it was the similar phenomenon when I was doing the interviews, and even though I tried not to ask about the abusive experiences many of the clients seemed to feel it was their obligation to tell their ”story”. I think the ”storytelling” is what they have been used to while dealing with many different workers (see for example Lawless 2001). In total, four out of six clients told me, some shorter some longer, stories about their lives with an abusive partner even though I tried not to encourage them to do that since I was not able to offer the women any counseling or other further help. While doing research I could not act as a social worker even though I felt urge to help some of the interviewees: I had to take the active role of a listener and hope that it was enough.

4.2 Theme Interview and Storytelling

According to Hirsjärvi and Hurme (2009) the advantages of interview are that the interviewee can act as a subject and construct his or her own meanings of the issue and so be an active participant of

26

(33)

the research. Interview is a good method especially if there is not much research of the topic yet or if the topic is sensitive. In the interview it is possible to ask clarifying questions and get an understanding of the issue in its context. Disadvantages of the interview are that the interviewee may answer as she thinks that she is expected to answer, it is also hard to separate the meaning of the interviewer as a part of the interview, and the interview demands skills and flexibility from the interviewer. However, interview is seen as a good method if the target group may have difficulties filling a form or may not be motivated to participate in a questionnaire. (Op.cit.,34-36.)

Since I decided to use interview as my research method it meant that I had to travel all the way to Canada. It was an expensive and challenging trip. I did it only because I believe that most of the immigrant women are only able to express themselves clearly in the face-to-face interaction. Some of them may not have been able to fill forms in English. My subject is really sensitive, and so I think the only way to build trust and motivate interviewees was to arrange meetings with the women in their own environment. According to Hirsjärvi, Remes and Sajavaara (2008) in an interview the client gets the possibility to tell freely about her situation, and to be the subject of her life, which was also my goal in the interviews.

As an interview method I chose to use a theme interview which is an intermediate between form and open interview. In the theme interview the interviewer usually knows the themes beforehand but there is no strict order of the questions. (Hirsjärvi & Remes & Sajavaara 2008, 203.) It is important to follow the themes, instead of asking detailed questions to let the interviewees´ voices to be heard. In a theme interview interviewees are considered as individuals having different kind of views and opinions on the issue, and thus their thoughts may vary depending on the context.

However, the theme interview is not as free as the open interview because it follows certain previously set themes. (Hirsjärvi & Hurme 2009, 48.)

I believe in the words of Elaine J. Lawless (2001) that it is not so meaningful if the interviewees are telling the accurate truth or not. According to Lawless, it is more important how the women view themselves and the world on that day of the interview. That is the only truth for the interviewer. The women will not have an opportunity to write and re-write their stories, but they are constructed the story while telling it. Despite the many times chaotic life situation the woman may be living, her story may be surprisingly coherent. This is often the result of her telling her story over and over again to other people to get through the system and to gain all the services. With the help of the workers the woman usually learns to tell her story in the ”right way”: she learns that her words have

Immigrant Women and Partner Violence